Who else is tired of this one thread ****. I thought the point of this forum was to discuss Beta Survival Mode, how are we supposed to do that efficiently in one god dam thread?!
Aye, the one thread idea is terrible. As is the constant locking of every update related thread (and some non-update related threads that are caught in the flames). The first problem is that it's a sticky. Stickies here have a really low visibility. Second, is that people are discussing more than one feature in-depth in one thread, which leads to confusion. The third is, that because of the second, the people who are going to create a new thread about a particular feature aren't deterred by that thread because they don't see *their* feature mentioned in the thread title.
A good solution would be splitting each update thread into a thread for each new feature and INCREASING THE VISIBILITY OF STICKIES.
I'm not sure why everyone is so surprised. We go through this every update day. We have talked about other methods of keeping the update madness contained, and even tried out a few ways, but this is the most effective:
ONE "Update 1.4!" thread.
If there is a specific topic thread with more discussion than "OMG I found wolves!" then that thread is alright, but only one for Heaven's sake. We don't need, or want, 10 wolf threads all basically saying the same thing.
As for the visibility of stickies, it is what it is. When we move to IPB maybe it'll improve.
You guys need to slap some bloody penalties on users who don't follow the rules. The kids will soon learn. Say a day temp posting ban? Seems apropriate enough. Some unsuspecting new users might be punsihed but new users should read rules too.
And also, granted it won't solve the single-thread-o-junk, you could disable new topic posting for Beta - Survival mode and Discussion on update day rather than locking left right and center so the forum is less unsightly. Legitimate new topics will just have to wait a day. There are a few other conseqences but i can't see anything too detrimental to the forums.
This may be an option for the new forums. Currently all Bans prohibit you from even viewing the site, so we don't like to hand them out like candy....unless we need to.
I like that idea icks, removing posting privileges for update day.. hm.. I can see how it might work, as long as it's not taxing on the forum software. We could also move to a day's worth of post approval for new topics, so new, non-update threads can get posted.
I'm not sure why everyone is so surprised. We go through this every update day. We have talked about other methods of keeping the update madness contained, and even tried out a few ways, but this is the most effective:
ONE "Update 1.4!" thread.
This is where a lot of us disagree. It's very hard to hold a discussion about an update with more than one big feature.
Perhaps a setup like this (using this update as an example):
Thread 1: Update Beta 1.4 Bugs
Thread 2: Update Beta 1.4 Wolves
Thread 3: Update Beta 1.4 The Joke Store
Thread 4: Update Beta 1.4 Minor updates (a misc thread for say for small things, like cookies or beds moving spawn points.
Then, at least we have to deal with spam on one topic instead of spam fro multiple topics and legit discussions for more than one topic clashing. Likewise, I think less people would be inclined to start new threads this way.
Likewise, I think less people would be inclined to start new threads this way.
But they don't care about starting new threads now, and even if there were 10 threads to post in, they still start new threads. Everyone is in such a furor to "OMG I HAVE TO MAKE A THREAD!" that they just don't care. No matter what setup we try, it comes back to the reality: We get spammed back to the Stone Age whenever Notch updates.
Hence, the "scorched earth" closing policy.
They're just threads. If it's closed, move on. It's not like we just killed your puppy.
It's not that I don't disagree with you, we just don't have a better way at the moment of dealing with that issue. We're not going to apologize for pages of locked threads that shouldn't have been created in the first place, and it's not like we're going to just let them loose until they go away. As much as it'd be easier for the Moderators, and Admins too, it's just not going to happen.
These phpBB forums really have no way to prevent posting without disabling the entire forums, which is counter-productive to being forums. It's why we're here. I suppose we could disable certain forums, but they'd spam other forums....and we could disable individual users, but that'd be like emptying a lake with a thimble....
I wouldn't disagree that a system where newbies need to wait or need approval would be bad, in fact I've discussed such a system myself, to mixed success, but it wasn't built into this software. Our options for how to handle this mess will open up when we move to IPB forums in a few weeks, and we'll look at some new methods then.
Until then, we'll be handling the thread spam and the harsher violations as we always have done: on a case-by-case basis.
A typical user's definition of spam varies from user to user. Many users who are not frequent reporters (AKA, nearly every user on this board) only report for things that either affect them or that are flaming or blatant advertising.
So, from the hundreds of reports that I've handled since I was promoted, I see "one-off" reporters reporting:
-Flaming against them.
-Advertising in their Server/Project/Mod thread.
-Memeposting or flaming that is against a group that user associates with.
-Things that offend them but aren't against the rules.
In times around updates, we get more reports from the typically non-reporters reporting redundant topics that don't affect them, but that is a few and far between occurrence.
Now, the frequent reporters will usually report:
-Flaming against other users, even when the flaming is against someone they disagree with.
-Advertising in other peoples' threads.
-Spam- memeposting, one word posting, image posting, etc.
-Threads in the wrong forum.
What we handle:
-Flaming against anyone or any group for any reason, and flamebaiting.
-Advertising out of place.
-Any kind of spam.
-Any kind of hacks, viruses, or phishing schemes.
-Trolling and trollbaiting.
-Anything else that breaks the rules.
So yes, there's an obvious division between "one-off" reporters (most users), frequent reporters (a small percentage of users), and staff (an even smaller percentage).
If it were up to the users to decide what is spam and what needs to be handled, we'd be in a much worse state of disarray. Not because our userbase is a bunch of anarchists and 4Channers, mind you. But because spam will be allowed, and then spam on spam, and spam on spam on spam, and flaming, etc. Things will quickly devolve. Real discussion will be pushed off the page in favor of "lol look at this" and "fail troll is fail" posts and similar.
So, spam is spam and it's not allowed here. Personally, I wouldn't mind letting some spam and off-topic replies fly, but where is the line drawn? I've noticed that allowing certain things opens the door for those who like to push their limits, and for the general userbase to take that as a "limit," up to which they can spam and get away with it. What I wish they would take it as is "there's a certain amount of leniency on spam, but I need to make sure that I'm not constantly spamming the place up." That would be a much better mindset and, if practiced by all of our users, would result in much fewer spam posts and locked threads and warnings and bans. But as it is, that wouldn't work.
Individual threads about the update will be allowed, but not on the day of simply because of the staggering influx of new topics, made in a line of thought similar to what LWK stated- "OMG I HAVE TO MAKE THIS NEW TOPIC!" So you'll probably get some individual place to discuss wolves or spawn points or miscellaneous updates- but not immediately, and I hope that you'll understand why that is.
It doesn't reduce spam. It funnels it all into 1 unreadable thread leaving us with no place to discuss anything without wading through all of it.
My thoughts exactly. Let's move this to Forum Discussion.
A good solution would be splitting each update thread into a thread for each new feature and INCREASING THE VISIBILITY OF STICKIES.
It works in other communities perfectly. The users just need to adjust.
http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/board,64.0.html
What's different:
Bolder text for thread title
Different background
Divider between stickies and normal threads
Extra icon on the far right.
What's the same:
Different thread icon.
There's quite a bit of room for improvement.
Also, thread and poll here.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=253991
ONE "Update 1.4!" thread.
If there is a specific topic thread with more discussion than "OMG I found wolves!" then that thread is alright, but only one for Heaven's sake. We don't need, or want, 10 wolf threads all basically saying the same thing.
As for the visibility of stickies, it is what it is. When we move to IPB maybe it'll improve.
Voyager of the Seas WIP ~~~~~ Big Book of Alchemy ~ Crafting Tech Tree
This may be an option for the new forums. Currently all Bans prohibit you from even viewing the site, so we don't like to hand them out like candy....unless we need to.
Voyager of the Seas WIP ~~~~~ Big Book of Alchemy ~ Crafting Tech Tree
This is where a lot of us disagree. It's very hard to hold a discussion about an update with more than one big feature.
Perhaps a setup like this (using this update as an example):
Thread 1: Update Beta 1.4 Bugs
Thread 2: Update Beta 1.4 Wolves
Thread 3: Update Beta 1.4 The Joke Store
Thread 4: Update Beta 1.4 Minor updates (a misc thread for say for small things, like cookies or beds moving spawn points.
Then, at least we have to deal with spam on one topic instead of spam fro multiple topics and legit discussions for more than one topic clashing. Likewise, I think less people would be inclined to start new threads this way.
But they don't care about starting new threads now, and even if there were 10 threads to post in, they still start new threads. Everyone is in such a furor to "OMG I HAVE TO MAKE A THREAD!" that they just don't care. No matter what setup we try, it comes back to the reality: We get spammed back to the Stone Age whenever Notch updates.
Hence, the "scorched earth" closing policy.
They're just threads. If it's closed, move on. It's not like we just killed your puppy.
Voyager of the Seas WIP ~~~~~ Big Book of Alchemy ~ Crafting Tech Tree
These phpBB forums really have no way to prevent posting without disabling the entire forums, which is counter-productive to being forums. It's why we're here. I suppose we could disable certain forums, but they'd spam other forums....and we could disable individual users, but that'd be like emptying a lake with a thimble....
I wouldn't disagree that a system where newbies need to wait or need approval would be bad, in fact I've discussed such a system myself, to mixed success, but it wasn't built into this software. Our options for how to handle this mess will open up when we move to IPB forums in a few weeks, and we'll look at some new methods then.
Until then, we'll be handling the thread spam and the harsher violations as we always have done: on a case-by-case basis.
Voyager of the Seas WIP ~~~~~ Big Book of Alchemy ~ Crafting Tech Tree
So, from the hundreds of reports that I've handled since I was promoted, I see "one-off" reporters reporting:
-Flaming against them.
-Advertising in their Server/Project/Mod thread.
-Memeposting or flaming that is against a group that user associates with.
-Things that offend them but aren't against the rules.
In times around updates, we get more reports from the typically non-reporters reporting redundant topics that don't affect them, but that is a few and far between occurrence.
Now, the frequent reporters will usually report:
-Flaming against other users, even when the flaming is against someone they disagree with.
-Advertising in other peoples' threads.
-Spam- memeposting, one word posting, image posting, etc.
-Threads in the wrong forum.
What we handle:
-Flaming against anyone or any group for any reason, and flamebaiting.
-Advertising out of place.
-Any kind of spam.
-Any kind of hacks, viruses, or phishing schemes.
-Trolling and trollbaiting.
-Anything else that breaks the rules.
So yes, there's an obvious division between "one-off" reporters (most users), frequent reporters (a small percentage of users), and staff (an even smaller percentage).
If it were up to the users to decide what is spam and what needs to be handled, we'd be in a much worse state of disarray. Not because our userbase is a bunch of anarchists and 4Channers, mind you. But because spam will be allowed, and then spam on spam, and spam on spam on spam, and flaming, etc. Things will quickly devolve. Real discussion will be pushed off the page in favor of "lol look at this" and "fail troll is fail" posts and similar.
So, spam is spam and it's not allowed here. Personally, I wouldn't mind letting some spam and off-topic replies fly, but where is the line drawn? I've noticed that allowing certain things opens the door for those who like to push their limits, and for the general userbase to take that as a "limit," up to which they can spam and get away with it. What I wish they would take it as is "there's a certain amount of leniency on spam, but I need to make sure that I'm not constantly spamming the place up." That would be a much better mindset and, if practiced by all of our users, would result in much fewer spam posts and locked threads and warnings and bans. But as it is, that wouldn't work.
Individual threads about the update will be allowed, but not on the day of simply because of the staggering influx of new topics, made in a line of thought similar to what LWK stated- "OMG I HAVE TO MAKE THIS NEW TOPIC!" So you'll probably get some individual place to discuss wolves or spawn points or miscellaneous updates- but not immediately, and I hope that you'll understand why that is.